Capacitive-Resistive Energy Transfer (CRET) for the Treatment of Low Back Pain

NCT ID: NCT06728215

Last Updated: 2025-02-12

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

52 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2023-10-01

Study Completion Date

2024-06-01

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

This retrospective observational study compares the effectiveness of two CRET therapies in adults with physical dysfunction. It evaluates whether the UNIQ electrode Fisiowarm 7.0 improves lumbar ROM (Schober test) and reduces pain (VAS scores) more effectively than the classical methodology, with assessments at baseline (T0) and two weeks (T1).

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The goal of this retrospective observational study is to compare the effectiveness of two CRET therapy methodologies in adults (mean age ±SD: 51.23±16.89 for treated, 51.20±14.34 for control; M/F ratio: 42%M, 58%F for treated, 40%M, 60%F for control) experiencing physical dysfunction.

The main questions it aims to answer are:

* Does treatment with the UNIQ electrode Fisiowarm 7.0 improve range of motion (ROM) as measured by the Schober test more effectively than the classical methodology?
* Does treatment with the UNIQ electrode Fisiowarm 7.0 reduce pain levels, as reported through VAS scores, more effectively than the classical methodology?

Participants underwent therapy with either Fisiowarm 7.0 or Activ CT8 INDIBA® as per their group assignment.

Have their ROM measured using the Schober test at baseline (T0) and after two weeks (T1).

Report VAS scores before therapy (T0) and after two weeks (T1) to assess pain levels.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Low Back Pain

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

OTHER

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

UNIQ capacitive/resistive electrode

subjects with LBP treated with Fisiowarm 7.0 and the new capacitive/resistive electrode (UNIQ electrode Fisiowarm 7.0, Golden Star Srl, Rome, Italy), for 15' at a frequency of 300 KHz (Treated Group)

CRET 1

Intervention Type DEVICE

Fisiowarm 7.0 and the new capacitive/resistive electrode, for 15' at a frequency of 300 KHz (Treated Group).

monopolar electrode group

Subject with LBP treated with a classical methodology using the monopolar electrode Activ CT8 INDIBA® at a frequency of 448 KHz in both resistive and capacitive modes, for 10 min each mode with two different electrodes. (Control group).

CRET 2

Intervention Type DEVICE

Classical methodology using the monopolar electrode Activ CT8 INDIBA® at a frequency of 448 KHz in both resistive and capacitive modes, for 10 min each mode with two different electrodes. (Control group).

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

CRET 1

Fisiowarm 7.0 and the new capacitive/resistive electrode, for 15' at a frequency of 300 KHz (Treated Group).

Intervention Type DEVICE

CRET 2

Classical methodology using the monopolar electrode Activ CT8 INDIBA® at a frequency of 448 KHz in both resistive and capacitive modes, for 10 min each mode with two different electrodes. (Control group).

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* age 18 years old or older
* reported a visual analogic scale (VAS) for pain equal or greater than 6 cm
* a ROM measured by Schober test
* naïve to CRET therapy
* non-concomitant physiotherapy treatment (e.g. diathermy, laser therapy etc..).
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

D&V FARMA srl

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Alessio Papaianopol, Doctor

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Ti Riabilita

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Ars Fisio

Rome, , Italy

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Italy

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Koes BW, van Tulder MW, Thomas S. Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain. BMJ. 2006 Jun 17;332(7555):1430-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7555.1430. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16777886 (View on PubMed)

Kim GW, Won YH, Park SH, Seo JH, Kim DH, Lee HN, Ko MH. Effects of a Newly Developed Therapeutic Deep Heating Device Using High Frequency in Patients with Shoulder Pain and Disability: A Pilot Study. Pain Res Manag. 2019 May 2;2019:8215371. doi: 10.1155/2019/8215371. eCollection 2019.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31191789 (View on PubMed)

Hoy D, Bain C, Williams G, March L, Brooks P, Blyth F, Woolf A, Vos T, Buchbinder R. A systematic review of the global prevalence of low back pain. Arthritis Rheum. 2012 Jun;64(6):2028-37. doi: 10.1002/art.34347. Epub 2012 Jan 9.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 22231424 (View on PubMed)

Dunabeitia I, Arrieta H, Torres-Unda J, Gil J, Santos-Concejero J, Gil SM, Irazusta J, Bidaurrazaga-Letona I. Effects of a capacitive-resistive electric transfer therapy on physiological and biomechanical parameters in recreational runners: A randomized controlled crossover trial. Phys Ther Sport. 2018 Jul;32:227-234. doi: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2018.05.020. Epub 2018 May 26.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29870922 (View on PubMed)

Clijsen R, Leoni D, Schneebeli A, Cescon C, Soldini E, Li L, Barbero M. Does the Application of Tecar Therapy Affect Temperature and Perfusion of Skin and Muscle Microcirculation? A Pilot Feasibility Study on Healthy Subjects. J Altern Complement Med. 2020 Feb;26(2):147-153. doi: 10.1089/acm.2019.0165. Epub 2019 Oct 3.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31580698 (View on PubMed)

Chiarotto A, Maxwell LJ, Terwee CB, Wells GA, Tugwell P, Ostelo RW. Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and Oswestry Disability Index: Which Has Better Measurement Properties for Measuring Physical Functioning in Nonspecific Low Back Pain? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Phys Ther. 2016 Oct;96(10):1620-1637. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20150420. Epub 2016 Apr 14.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27081203 (View on PubMed)

Bardin LD, King P, Maher CG. Diagnostic triage for low back pain: a practical approach for primary care. Med J Aust. 2017 Apr 3;206(6):268-273. doi: 10.5694/mja16.00828.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28359011 (View on PubMed)

Barassi G, Mariani C, Supplizi M, Prosperi L, Di Simone E, Marinucci C, Pellegrino R, Guglielmi V, Younes A, Di Iorio A. Capacitive and Resistive Electric Transfer Therapy: A Comparison of Operating Methods in Non-specific Chronic Low Back Pain. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2022;1375:39-46. doi: 10.1007/5584_2021_692.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 35147930 (View on PubMed)

Bahns C, Happe L, Thiel C, Kopkow C. Physical therapy for patients with low back pain in Germany: a survey of current practice. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Jun 19;22(1):563. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04422-2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 34147077 (View on PubMed)

Amjad F, Mohseni Bandpei MA, Gilani SA, Arooj A. Reliability of modified-modified Schober's test for the assessment of lumbar range of motion. J Pak Med Assoc. 2022 Sep;72(9):1755-1759. doi: 10.47391/JPMA.4071.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 36280970 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

FISIO01

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.